From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 08/10] iser-target: Support the remote invalidation exception Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 20:24:06 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1448382234-24806-1-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <1448382234-24806-9-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <5655698A.4020306@dev.mellanox.co.il> <565575E9.9070100@dev.mellanox.co.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <565575E9.9070100@dev.mellanox.co.il> Sender: target-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Sagi Grimberg Cc: Sagi Grimberg , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , target-devel@vger.kernel.org, "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , Or Gerlitz , Jenny Derzhavetz , Steve Wise List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > On 25/11/2015 10:41, Or Gerlitz wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Sagi Grimberg >> wrote: >> I see, so if this is case, can you eliminate one the checks here >>>>> + if (isert_conn->snd_w_inv && isert_cmd->inv_rkey) { > This are *exactly* the checks that enforce what I said above. > If we remove that we'd step on the bug you mentioned. > We do remote invalidate only if: > - we are allowed to (send_w_inv) > - initiator passed us rkey (inv_rkey). yep, should be probably OK. You didn't respond to my comment re adding bools vs bit-fields vs bit-flags Or.